[argyllcms] Re: workflow

Gerhard Fuernkranz wrote:
> more problematic, also due to the issue you mentioned below. Anyway, the 
> major problem with scanner based printer calibration still seems to be 
> scanner/obervser metamerism.

I would imagine so. I'm not sure that low resolution screens pose
the greatest problem in terms of inaccuracy, since the very nature
of a bi-tonal system is to make the transfer curve irrelevant. Only
the ink/no-ink values count. The higher the scanning resolution and
the coarser the screen, the less influence the "in between" levels
at screen dot edges becomes.

> Basically I like it! Scan, crop roughly, scanin, done :-) And yes, it 
> works pretty reliably, but sometimes, it fails. Unfortunately, if it 
> fails, one is lost.

Yes, I haven't really thought about a fallback. Perhaps something like
a manual version of the interactive approach ? e.g. define some fiducials
in the reference (eg. 3 corners), and allow them to be entered as parameters.
The scaling, rotation, offset could then be directly computed. This
wouldn't be too hard I guess.

> So do I. Usually. Nevertheless it also happened to me in the past in an 
> incautious moment ...

I'll keep this suggestion in mind (creating the archives with a parent
directory), but probably won't do anything in the immediate future.

Graeme Gill.

Other related posts: